AkashM
Hi Andrew
MentorTutoring,
Need your help.
From what I understand, the stem says,
Expectation: Local economy will also flourish along with the mall.
Reality: Local economy does not flourish as expected (but there is some increase in activity)
Option D, which is the OA, states that money that would have been spent in the local economy is now spent in the mall. It seems to me if that were the case, then local economy would be taking a hit. But in the stem its mentioned that there is some increase in local economic, so I don't understand how can this option resolve the paradox.
Where as option B tells us why there is good amount of economic activity in the mall but not in the local economy. Although it does not mention anything about the little increase seen in the local economy as mentioned in the stem, it does not imply there has been a reduction.
I am not able to understand where am I going wrong! Could you share your thoughts on this.
Regards,
Akash
Hello, Akash. As LSAT questions go, this one is about as GMAT™-friendly as could be. I took about a minute and a half to settle on (D). The discrepancy is between
expectations that the local economy will see a certain increase once a
large shopping mall opens in the area and the
reality that such an increase to the local economy
is typically much smaller than the total amount of economic activity that goes on in the mall. If the businesses in the mall were taking away potential sales from local businesses outside the mall, then the discrepancy would be resolved, and this is exactly the picture that (D) paints. To piggyback off of choice (B), let us say that the area in which the mall is built generates most of its annual revenue from tourism. If these tourists used to visit and spend money in the town, but many of them now spend money in the mall instead, then the mall economy might flourish while the economy of the town might underperform. Note that a
much smaller increase could or could not refer to a decrease. Perhaps, too, the tourists are actually spending more money on the whole than they used to, since they have more choices, but since a lot of that money might still be spent in the mall, the larger community might make just marginal gains. Any of a number of possibilities exist, but (D) presents a valid way for that to happen. Meanwhile, choice (B) only indicates that the mall has attracted more tourists to the area. We know that the majority of mall revenue comes from this group, according to the answer choice, but it could also be true that since the tourists are now visiting an area in which they had not taken any interest before, they are spending some of their money outside the mall, too. (I doubt the mall sells gasoline, for example; a local business might benefit from the influx of even dedicated mall tourists.) All other things being equal, we would expect the local economy to benefit in proportion to the number of new tourists (plus old ones) flocking to the area.
It is not that I cannot see your point with (B). It is an alluring option, even if my experience allowed me to write it off immediately. What it comes down to is that it lacks the seesaw (give-and-take) relationship outlined in (D) between the local economy and the mall economy. Choice (B) is one-sided, since the local community was apparently not benefiting in the first place from these tourists.
I hope that helps. If you have further questions, feel free to ask. My best advice with these sorts of questions is to follow the linear logic of the passage and question stem. The more you conjure up to justify an answer, the less likely it is to be correct. And of course, practice more questions and look for patterns.
- Andrew